Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Research yourself, does Intel have DoD contracts? Then read all of Gold49er's and ZPaul's excellent posts regarding SFOR IP and Intel.
Then research just what ACS has been doing on SFOR's behalf and you'll know what to do. Long & Strong SFOR.
So you're saying Intel has no Government contracts?
"Goodbye Mr. Chips" is what SFOR investors will be saying as the first truckload of Intel chips, containing SFOR IP, head for what the ACS briefer stated was "A major Defense Contractor." I thank Gold49er for opening my eyes as to the technicalities of this. I knew SFOR worked & played well with Intel. However, I had no idea SFOR IP had percolated down to their chip level. Please read all of his thoroughly researched posts on this subject along with ZPaul's commentary on the topic. Those were mind opening to me gentlemen and I thank you both for enlightening me! Intel of course is a completely vetted, well connected, DoD supplier.
Yup. NSA has a technical rep at DISA meetings. You'll recall on slide 15 of the ACS presentation that's who they briefed.
Ben Hodges' office did accept the package of MT I sent him via Amazon Prime last summer. Having been attached to EUCOM/HQ I recalled his address in Wiesbaden, GE. No, it was not returned.
Read ZPaul's note about the integration into Intel chips. Then refer to Jtcch's post 154957 regarding DoD TPM Requirements.
"Protocol is currently integrated into Intels TPM for enterprise endpoint deployment. Also review the fine work done ny Gold49er on this issue. This slices through the DoD procurement paperwork some here would lead you to believe is a show stopper. It isn't!
What I was told was that the sale was also in effect for the whole of Sunday. Consequently, that days sales should also be included in the final total. Correct?
You have selective memory Peggy. We actually had individuals who work for DoD contractors defeat that debate point. Also, we both know operational needs will be met particularly when there is a flag officer like Lt/Gen Ben Hodges reporting his vulnerability.
"My Blackberry is being monitored" and (unclassified) "E-mails are insecure" to AFN News. Ya think that got some appropriate attention?
If that was only the figure for the first segment then one can reasonably assume the others did just as well or better. That couple thousand figure I got from the HSN operator when asked about "Best Seller" status is within reason. I eagerly await your posting of the final sales figures for the entire 2 day sale period.
Thank you for researching & doing this!
Uncle Sam doesn't knowingly deal with thieves. That's another reason this DoD TPM Requirement is so comforting to me. The Federal Government is concerned about fraud, waste and abuse. It has a program in place to report & deal with it. Let's take an example applicable to SFOR. Did you ever wonder why Gemalto was on the hit parade for Ropes and Gray? Do you think it had anything to do with Gemalto's rolling out of OOBA/MFA for DoD's SIPRNET? To paraphrase Mark Kay. Infringers will have to pay to play!
Emails? I wrote 535 letters to all the members of the United States Congress. I also wrote senior DoD officials and the White House. The replies to that correspondence were kindly posted here by ZPaul for me. The originals, on letterhead, with watermark, of course are on file with SFOR. Mark Kay told me he would show hem to any share holder in-person when requested. "Nothing came of it" eh. That's funny, that's not what the DoD/CIO's office said when they called me. A sales presentation by ACS was arranged and took place. Call Mark Kay to verify. ACS of course is the Pentagon's FULLY vetted vendor, SFOR is only a supplier to ACS of software since it doesn't manufacture. It is of course purchasing SFOR's keyboard encryption patent for 9 million dollars. As far as SFOR "not being eligible" that argument was soundly defeated here by previous posters who have DoD contract experience.
Thank you for informing us of that. So then 1 May should be the release date, correct?
It wasn't just me! For months I got PMs or people posted here they were writing the DoD, President, their US Senator or US Representative on the issue. Make no mistake about it. This was a team effort. Now I dare ask to please consider writing the CIA and ODNI as I have. Their Directors are writing the national "Anti-Hacking Plan." If you believe OOBA/MFA should be mentioned in that plan as I do now is the time to write! The plan must be on the President's desk in June.
Did they request and get a two week extension on the 10-K filing date from the SEC or what?
So many people fail to realize the importance of this! Thank you for finding this in a ACS whitepaper and sharing it with us. Now there can be no doubt, that DoD is fully embracing keyboard encryption and OOBA for its "new computer assets". Gee, I wonder what little defensive software company has the patents on that?
That quote, is the "Mission Accomplished" banner. Together, as a team, we longs "Raised Pentagon awareness of SFOR products" as Mark Kay said to me. By writing the DoD, Congress and the White House we informed decision makers of the potential SFOR solution to the mil-issue I-Phone COMSEC problem and they acted on that by promulgating that TPM Requirement. Job well done longs! Because of this DoD requirement I personally can stand down. I rest secure in the knowledge that our military will soon have, as President Trump promised, the best cyber defense. SFOR IP will have a vital role in helping provide that. Consequently, the next time my kin & their battle buddies deploy they will be safer! A heartfelt thank you to all of you who helped make that happen.
Great! It was SFOR that earned it though, I just reported it.
Agree for the most part. I believe that yesterday's HSN sale was like a comming out party for a pretty 16 year old young woman. SFOR, she will get noticed more!
Higher priority mission. Grandkids arrive for a visit tomorrow. I will be off this board for a few days until they leave. GLTA longs!
In my previous post I apologized to you for creating any misunderstanding in what I related from the MSN service representative.
I understand why Federal Government Confidentiality Statements and legally binding non-disclosure statements are necessary. However, it's hard to see the SFOR light hidden under the proverbial wicker basket at times!
Glad to see SFOR has achieved that "Showstopper" status for it's initial HSN debut. Thank you for finding and posting that.
I admit it, I'm the culprit. I took the ACS briefer at face value when he stated in the presentation "We own 100 percent of that patent". I say what I mean and mean what I say. He apparently did not. I was wrong in believing that statement as Gospel. I sincerely hope there were no more inaccuracies in the ACS presentation.
I agree and the 10-K backs up your thought. It said something to the effect of cleaning up the balance sheet to be more attractive for a potential buyout.
The number of segments is not as significant as the number of sales.
Dragnet wrote he will research and provide those to us tomorrow. Thank you for doing that because that's where the rubber meets the road.
My bad. Bear in mind the 4 segments for the period of the sale was told to me by a customer service rep this AM.
There are not 4 segments per week. It was 4 segments only yesterday. The customer service rep could not tell me anything about the future scheduling of SFOR products on HSN. Sorry for any confusion.
"Not bad", just wait until the HSN's SFOR final sales are posted here tomorrow before you down play them as just not bad!
Don't beat yourself up! They couldn't give you a firm number today until the sale is over at midnight. I look forward to you posting it tomorrow AM and thank you for your efforts.
I have yet to see anything to the effect that Ropes and Gray are working on contingency. I have for Blank and Rome, Do you have a link for that? This is why I asked the board how we could possible afford a legal effort of this magnitude for long given the 10-K figures? Something's up. The money is comming from somewhere with deep pockets and that sure isn't SFOR IMHO.
It would be inaccurate as of now. I was informed that the sale on item # 543100 SFOR's Guarded ID/MT was continuing throughout today. I assume that means the sale ends midnight so a final sales figure will not be available until then.
I also asked what's their "Best Seller" criteria since SFOR was listed as one at the conclusion. She simply stated "They sold a lot!" I then asked does that mean a couple hundred? she said "No, thousand but I don't have the exact count." If anyone has an accurate final count (after today since the sale ends at midnight) please share it with us tomorrow. Thanks!
Also don't forget the ACS briefer stated "A major Defense Contractor" at slide fifteen.
When I called HSN customer service today I asked, and was informed, that there were a total of four segments shown before midnight. Does that jive with your information?
You have a valid point. Mine came out of the crucible of the US financial crisis. I saw millions of Americans who told people they "own their homes" foreclosed. I NEVER said that until the mortgage note burning party. Until that day, I did not "100 percent" own my home. The bank did! I now concede that the ACS briefer used a very poor choice of words in a very public forum. If I had done so as a military briefer, at the very least, I would have been called on the carpet about it.
IMHO The next thing Kay drops is the up listing. That was shared on this board yesterday by a poster who published Mark's e-mail to him that he was working on it. Finally getting off the pink sheets and into a better neighborhood will help!
You have a very valid point!
May 17th the final Kabuki theater act for Duo, Centrify and Trustwave. That is good news indeed!
STRONGLY Disagree with "No DoD contract, a myth so this stock could be pumped" Did you not hear the ACS presenter clearly mention on slide # 15 and I quote "A major Defense Contractor." I believe the man speaks the Queen's English as well as you and I. Now, just what did he mean by that statement if it was not directly related to what the (unnamed for DoD confidentiality statement purposes) contractor does for the United States Department of Defense? I'm all ears!
I was once told by a senior Congressional staffer that an old fashion letter carries more weigh than a phone call or e-mail.
That's exactly why I wrote all 535 members of Congress about the potential SFOR solution to the mil-issue I-Phone COMSEC problem, MT
Agree. "I like to help the companies I'm involved in." Like you, I am an activist share holder. Because I am a long, I feel part owner of SFOR, and I want it to succeed. If, like you, there is some way I believe I can help I will take the initiative and do so. Keep up the good work Dragnet! Together as a team, we can and I believe will, make a difference for SFOR.